Welcome to the Online Archive of the Old PublicEye.Org Website

Please remember that this is an archive of an older website for researchers, and it is not being updated. Therefore, much of the material here is not current.
Much like any library archive, it is "out-of-date." Brick and mortar libraries do not toss out older resource materials, they archive them. That is what we have done here.

Different Sectors on the Right

To understand the coalition that formed to promote the impeachment of
Clinton it is necessary to review the main sectors in the secular, Christian,
and xenophobic right. One way to do this is to observe the various topical
coalitions. Another is to look at groups, institutions and movements. In
addition, there is a methodological dividing line on the political right,
the conservative right (which embraces electoral strategies), versus the
hard right (which embraces some form of antidemocratic or authoritarian
control). [See Chart One in Appendix].

In this article the term Secular Right refers to electorally-focused conservatives,
neo-conservatives, and mild reactionaries primarily motivated by issues
involving economics, foreign policy, or traditional morality, and operating
within the electoral system. Institutional examples include the American
Enterprise Institute, Hoover Institution, Heritage Foundation, American
Security Council, and Center for Strategic and International Studies. Ultra-conservative
members of groups such as the John Birch Society anchor the right-wing
of this sector and overlap with both the Christian Right and the Xenophobic
Right.

The term Christian Right refers to theologically-motivated reactionaries,
primarily fundamentalist Christian evangelicals, who seek to impose on
secular society their religious views on morality and culture, but who
still are operating within the electoral system.180 This
is a resurgence of the Calvinistic vision of settlers in Massachusetts'
Puritan colony who banished free thinkers as heretics.181 Institutional
examples include the Christian Coalition, Free Congress Foundation, Focus
on the Family, Concerned Women for America, and Traditional Values Coalition.
The milder form will be called Christian nationalism and the more aggressive
and authoritarian form will be called Christian theocracy.

The term Xenophobic Right refers to right-wing dissidents and revolutionaries
with contempt for or a fear of difference, alien ideas, or immigrants.
This sector is motivated by a variety of themes including reactionary ultraconservatism,
regressive populism, white racial nationalism, or ethno-racial chauvinism
rooted in white supremacy and antisemitism. Institutional examples include
the Liberty Lobby and Aryan Nations. The more xenophobic wing of the John
Birch Society fits here. This sector includes the regressive populists
in the patriot and armed militia movements, as well as the far right, consisting
of overt race hate groups, and organizations with revolutionary agendas,
including the Ku Klux Klan, various Christian Patriot formations, and groups
promoting Christian Identity.

Many groups in all three sectors have at least some philosophical roots
in orthodox versions of Calvinistic Protestant Christianity, especially
support for heterosexual patriarchy, individualism, and a free market economy.
The WASP has its sting. There is overlap at the margins of the sectors,
and some ultra-conservative political ideologues such as Pat Buchanan and
Sam Francis draw from all three tendencies. Nonetheless, the secular, Christian,
and xenophobic branches of the right each have distinguishing characteristics
and operate as self-conscious movements.182

The Fusionist Coalition

The Christian Right is part of a longstanding coalition within the Republican
Party that began by finding common points of agreement within economic
libertarianism, social traditionalism, and militant anticommunism.183 This
conservative coalition was called "Fusionism." Jerome L. Himmelstein
wrote that:

The core assumption that binds these three
elements is the belief that American society on all levels has an organic
order--harmonious, beneficent, and self-regulating--disturbed only
by misguided ideas and policies, especially those propagated by a liberal
elite in the government, the media, and the universities.184

With the collapse of the Cold War, militant anti-communism has been expanded
into a conceptual framework that can be usefully called "militant
anti-collectivism," an umbrella for fighting the globalist New World
Order, the United Nations, Chinese communism, liberal "New Deal" Democrats,
and the so-called tyranny of political correctness. The durability of the
reconstituted fusionist coalition on the right can be seen in how it is
replicated in the anti-Clinton coalition. An extensive review of rightist
attacks on Clinton over the past several years shows that they cluster
in familiar groups:

Moral Collapse

gay rights

abortion

feminists

pornography

non-traditional sexuality

violence

Statist Intrusion

big government

onerous taxes

government regulations

environment

land use

parental rights

job site safety

activist judges

Collectivist Conspiracy

liberal media bias

government tyranny

treason

New World Order globalism

Satanic One World Government

As people became swept up in the impeachment campaign, the specific charges
of sexual misconduct, lying under oath, and obstruction of justice were
taken seriously, but the underlying motivations flowed from pre-existing
hard-line grievances against Clinton. Nonetheless, attempts by House Republicans
(and their allies in hard right national organizations) to broaden the
base for impeachment failed. Sociologist Sara Diamond points out, "The
right's elite-oriented and mass-based contingents are autonomous but mutually
dependent on each other." Yet the use of populist-style rhetoric by
elite political leaders does not always spark a grassroots populist movement
outside the hard-core loyal grassroots constituency.

Polling over the past two decades shows that depending on the issue and
the definition, this hard right constituency fluctuates somewhere between
2 and 12 percent of the general adult population. What is crucial to understand,
is that they represent a much higher percentage of actual voters. According
to Sara Diamond:

In June 1994, a New York Times poll
revealed that about 9 percent of a national sample identified themselves
as part of the Christian Right....Exit poll data indicate that about
25 percent of the people who voted in November 1994 were white evangelical
Christians. Among these, about two-thirds voted Republican.185

Other polls show similar results, with the Christian Right electorate
generally representing some 11 to 15 percent of voters in elections when
they mobilize a heavy turnout.186